This is sobering

rockj7

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,465
Reaction score
2,195
Kuno9AJ.jpg
 

ScipioCowboy

More than meets the eye.
Messages
25,053
Reaction score
17,311
To be honest, I couldn't give a **** about what's happened since 1997. The team was completely talent deprived for the early 2000s. I'm more troubled by missing the playoffs over the past four years. Those were prime years for a statistically brilliant quarterback.
 

OhSnap

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,591
Reaction score
721
I wouldn't be anymore happy if they had 7 wins like the Jets.
If we grabbed a SB like the Rams or the Bucs 10 years ago I wouldn't like the last 5 years any more than I do today.
The other thing I see on that list is how few teams have had continuous success during that time.
 

DFWJC

Well-Known Member
Messages
59,396
Reaction score
48,222
Ugly.

Just curious, why was the year 1997 used as a starting point?
It's not an round year like 20, 25 or 30 years ago.
Could it have been to maximize the very worst case for Dallas?
 

TheDude

McLovin
Messages
12,053
Reaction score
10,398
Ugly.

Just curious, why was the year 1997 used as a starting point?
It's not an round year like 20, 25 or 30 years ago.
Could it have been to maximize the very worst case for Dallas?

Definitely a Dallas centric timeframe. But since it is a Dallas focused board, any year between 1997 and 2000 is relevant...the team was in decline after 1996, the triplets began to fall off, and no doubt jerry was large and in charge for the rebuild after aikman, Irvin, deion, Lett, Haley, novacek, Johnston, et am began to move on.
 

DFWJC

Well-Known Member
Messages
59,396
Reaction score
48,222
To be honest, I couldn't give a **** about what's happened since 1997. The team was completely talent deprived for the early 2000s. I'm more troubled by missing the playoffs over the past four years. Those were prime years for a statistically brilliant quarterback.

I agree, that time frame is far more significant for those living in the present. It's also disturbing. My guess is that if the team made the playoffs the past three years, they would still not have won another playoff game. It's frustrating, nevertheless.
 

WPBCowboysFan

Well-Known Member
Messages
10,265
Reaction score
6,532
Ugly.

Just curious, why was the year 1997 used as a starting point?
It's not an round year like 20, 25 or 30 years ago.
Could it have been to maximize the very worst case for Dallas?

It fit the agenda!

Why not pick 1992 as a starting point for number of Super Bowl wins? And even include Super Bowl winning %?
 
Top